Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
K.G. Vora Securites P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax on 22 March, 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELL ATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCHES, 'A', MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (JM) AND SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA (AM)
ITA No.6346/Mum/2010
(Assessment Year: 2006-07)
Dy.Commissioner of M/s K.G.Vora
Incom e Tax Securities P.Ltd.,
4(3), 40,
Room No.649, V/s Khatau Building 8/10,
6 t h Floor, Alkesh Dinesh Mody
Aayakar Bhavan, Marg,
M K Road, Fort,
Mumbai-400020.
Mumbai-400023
PAN: AABCK1732D
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Date of Hearing : 22.3.2012
Date of Pronouncement : 29.3.2012
Appellant by : Shri N.K.Mehta
Respondent by : Shri Mandar Vaidya
O R D E R
PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (JM) This appeal preferred by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 11.6.2010 passed by the ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2006-07.
2. The Grounds taken by the Revenue read as under :
"1. (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.6,18,952/- made u/s.40(a)(ia) in respect of VSAT, leaseline and transactional charges paid to Stock Exchange, without appreciating the facts that ITA No.6346/Mum/2010 2 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) these were composite charges for professional and technical services rendered by the stock exchange to its members and the assessee has failed to deduct TDS thereon.
(ii). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that these services are essential in nature as they can only be availed by members of Stock Exchange.
(iii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the facts that use of technology and algorithmic based programs have converted an erstwhile physical market into a digitally operated market.
(iv) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that the services rendered by the brokers are not standard services but services that has been developed to cater to the needs of the broker community to facilitate trading."
(v) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has overlooked the fact that the brokers have in subsequent years themselves started deducting the TDS on such payments and that there is no reason to give a different treatment in this year."
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is contrary to law to be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored."
3. At the time of hearing, it was observed that the tax effect on the disputed amount of Rs.6,18,952/- in the appeal filed by the revenue is less than the monetary limit of Rs.3,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT. The learned Departmental Representative did not dispute on the said factual matrix of the case.
ITA No.6346/Mum/2010
3 (Assessment Year: 2006-07)
4. That being so and in view of the recent CBDT Instruction No. 3 of 2011 dated 9th February, 2011 reported in (2011) 332 ITR 1 (Statutes) and the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Madhukar K. Inamdar (HUF) (2009) 318 ITR 148(Bom), wherein it has been held that the revised monetary limit in the Circular dated May 15, 2008 would be applicable for all pending appeals and also the consistent view of the Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal, we are of the view that the Department should not have filed the appeal and accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
5. In the result, the Revenue's appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29th Mar., 2012.
Sd sd
(N.K.BILLAIYA) ( DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, 29th March, 2012
SRL:
ITA No.6346/Mum/2010
4 (Assessment Year: 2006-07)
Copy to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT Co ncerned
4. CIT(A) concerned
5. DR conce rned Bench
6. Guard file.
BY ORDER
True co py
ASSTT. REGISTRAR,
ITAT, MUMBAI